He most likely means you'll be paying so much even they can't pretend it's a amall transaction, let alone "micro".spartandude said:so all mobile games will have them? well as i dont play any mobile games and from what i hear thats the standard business model all i can say is meh
however he didnt say that all 'proper' games (my words tbh) wont have them. and by "extensions" what does he mean? actual DLC/Expansions or slightly larger chunks of MTs?
Experience teaches us so far that generally if there's a new fancy word in town, it means you're getting shafted real soon. I can't really blame people for being somewhat mistrustful of him not using perfectly fine, already existing words like "expansion pack", and "DLC".Mortis Nuncius said:Also, don't know why people are flipping shit at the phrasing ?extensions". I mean is that not what standard DLC is? An extension of the game?
I mean my goodness, it's like EA can't even scratch their own ass without putting people into an uproar...
Well they are for me.Kargathia said:Also, chances are EA is triggering pavlov reflexes...
...And we have a winner for strongest thread response. Who here is with me to officially send this response to EA?VanQ said:I have a clean record on the escapist and at the risk of ruining that record I'm going to say this anyway. This man can shove a dragon dildo so far up his own arse I hope he can taste it."We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level, to buy a new character; to buy a truck or gun or whatever it might be," Jorgensen said. "And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business."
Sell me hats or minipets or pretty dresses or whatever cosmetic items you want to in the form of MTs if I didn't pay you full price for your game. But fuck you for even a second if you expect me to pay you for power in a game that I paid any money up front for. Especially if it's a MP game. And all of your games have MP, EA.
A statement like this really grills me. It's like he has zero respect for his own customers and claiming that we like this is honest proof he doesn't give a shit enough to even look at what people are saying about it.
I dont play mobile games si i wasnt aware of this, bloody....... i wouldnt pay that much for some PC games they are asking for these mobile games.....FoolKiller said:Hmm... free mobile games, huh?
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ea.games.meinfiltrator_na&feature=search_result
do any of those games seem free?
I guess his concept of "free" is just like his use of the word "all"
Uhuh. Totally. You should probably stop talking now, Jorgensen.Andy Chalk said:"We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way..."
"I made a statement in the conference along the lines of 'We'll have microtransactions in our games,' and the community read that to be 'all games,' and that's really not true,"
Mate you do know having the CFO make a blanket statement about including DLC into every game to the point where it affects how the game is played (IE buying higher levels, new characters) will put people into an uproar. Once more this is from a company where PR is shit, and already has a black eye with many gamers due to their handling of online sales, DRM, studio closing, ect. Don't act like this is just EA scratching their ass, they're taking a shit and not many people were happy about it.Mortis Nuncius said:This thread is going right about where I thought it would go...
Anywho, glad to see he made that clarification to his former statement, at least I'll have less worry of the inclusion of it in future console titles.
Also, don't know why people are flipping shit at the phrasing ?extensions". I mean is that not what standard DLC is? An extension of the game?
I mean my goodness, it's like EA can't even scratch their own ass without putting people into an uproar...
Not sure if we're reading the same article here...NiPah said:Mate you do know having the CFO make a blanket statement about including DLC into every game to the point where it affects how the game is played (IE buying higher levels, new characters) will put people into an uproar. Once more this is from a company where PR is shit, and already has a black eye with many gamers due to their handling of online sales, DRM, studio closing, ect. Don't act like this is just EA scratching their ass, they're taking a shit and not many people were happy about it.Mortis Nuncius said:This thread is going right about where I thought it would go...
Anywho, glad to see he made that clarification to his former statement, at least I'll have less worry of the inclusion of it in future console titles.
Also, don't know why people are flipping shit at the phrasing ?extensions". I mean is that not what standard DLC is? An extension of the game?
I mean my goodness, it's like EA can't even scratch their own ass without putting people into an uproar...
Clearly this is what this is about, you don't understand why people are in an uproar and yet you didn't notice when I quoted directly from Blake Jorgensen:Mortis Nuncius said:Not sure if we're reading the same article here...NiPah said:Mate you do know having the CFO make a blanket statement about including DLC into every game to the point where it affects how the game is played (IE buying higher levels, new characters) will put people into an uproar. Once more this is from a company where PR is shit, and already has a black eye with many gamers due to their handling of online sales, DRM, studio closing, ect. Don't act like this is just EA scratching their ass, they're taking a shit and not many people were happy about it.
Yes, he made a blanket statement, and this was him changing that statement. And I recall him referring to those "extensions" as "premium services and add-ons", not these paying to win micro-transactions. Furthermore, please stop bringing in those tired old points, that's not what this is about. It's him making a statement, and him making a poor, sloppy change of it for the better. That's it. Nothing more. For crying out loud, it's like trying to take a picture with my grandmother at Christmas, but then she just keeps going on about how I accidentally vacuumed her Mittens' tail even though it's completely irrelevant to the situation and entirely outdated...
I didn't know he was under the couch, Meredith!!
It was quoted in this article and the previous one because it was the reason people were angry. I mean sure most companies would be forgiven for a poorly worded statement from one of their heads, but this is EA, which is why their previous piss poor PR comes into play when getting angry."We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level, to buy a new characters; to buy a truck or gun or whatever it might be," says Blake Jorgensen, EA's CFO. "And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business."
But that's the thing, people are still angry about those words, that business model that he announced, when in this current article he's quite clearly saying that's not the way they're gonna go. They're arguing something that is no longer relevant. Yes, you did directly quote the man, but that was in regards to the former plan, the one that is being scrapped as he states and is being replaced by the one wherein the only micro-transactions to be had will be for their mobile games. People are in uproar over something that was announced to be not the course of action anymore. So yes, I did notice your outdated quote, and no, I don't understand why people are still in uproar for reasons specified above.NiPah said:*snip*
How can you not fault Acti-Blizzard but fault all the rest for trying to take a slice of the pie? I struggle to fault any of them at this point. People keep handing them money and they exist to take money.SkarKrow said:I was more focusing on the CoD side of things to be honest, I don't know much of the Activendizzard dealigns with MMO's and shit dude, I don't do MMO's unfortuneately.squid5580 said:It's funny because I blame Acti-Blizzard for the mess we find ourselves in these days. Well not all of it but a good chunk. They were the ones who decided to sell a skin for a mount for $25 in a game that they charge $15 a month to play. That sold millions. You mean to tell me that other companies didn't take notice when they got away with selling horse armor for 25 bucks in a subscription based game?SkarKrow said:I find it hard to hate activision because these days it never really does anything wrong, or insults customers or whatever. It just kinda sits their printing money for itself, which I can't fault it for really. When the COD sales slow down they might throw some of their giant money pile at a new engine or something.MrMan999 said:EA's incompetence is only matched by its evilness. At least Activision is content to release yearly Call of Duty sequels and stay in their little niche. EA somehow manages to fuck up everything they touch.
However in the situation you mentioned I can't really blame them for that, if people are dumb enough to pay it I'd do the exact same thing in that situation and milk the hell out of it. I more blame the companies that copy them with overpriced DLC, undeveloped yearly sequels and no real imagination to new titles.
I understand your point, but the reason people are still angry is that they don't believe him. Like I said PR plays a huge part in this whole episode, most wouldn't put it past EA to blatantly lie to save face, while sticking with the previously stated policy.Mortis Nuncius said:But that's the thing, people are still angry about those words, that business model that he announced, when in this current article he's quite clearly saying that's not the way they're gonna go. They're arguing something that is no longer relevant. Yes, you did directly quote the man, but that was in regards to the former plan, the one that is being scrapped as he states and is being replaced by the one wherein the only micro-transactions to be had will be for their mobile games. People are in uproar over something that was announced to be not the course of action anymore. So yes, I did notice your outdated quote, and no, I don't understand why people are still in uproar for reasons specified above.NiPah said:*snip*
Mortis Nuncius said:Snicker
Down with the vorpal blades, you two. It cuts just a hair too quick.NiPah said:Snack
Touché oh man of great wisdom, I'll agree to disagree and devote my time thinking about which anime I should watch next.FalloutJack said:Mortis Nuncius said:SnickerSnockNiPah said:Snack
I'm assuming that it goes something like this...Karadalis said:Backpaddling so hard you can go up a waterfall
The thing is Paradox makes a game then sees where they can improve upon it depending on customer feedback, then they make an expansion/extension and sell it as DLC.Halyah said:That's probably because in paradoxs case it seems to be cosmetic things or stuff that expands/adds the base gameplay of the games they make(prime examples of the latter being Sword of Islam and The Republic for Crusader Kings 2). Mind you I can't speak for the games they don't make themselves as I've little experience with those.joonsk said:This isn't bad news. Paradox has been doing stuff like this for ages, and they don't get as much hate as EA. EA has been doing lots of stupid stuff, but at least they're trying to fix there reputation.